2007/7/26, Anitha Boyapati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Pizarro, (hope I got the name correctly!). The central idea of patch is nice. Although it is obvious from the patch, just to say - you are printing out the elf data structure size by means of 'len' and the command mode Elf_Cmd 'cmd'. But I fail to understand the purpose of Elf * . It started off with some address and then went for another! The report quite clearly says the length is shooting off. I didnt have a heart to run it completely. Neverthless, I am not sure about attaching quite a big file after running it for 1 hour :-) I am giving a much more truncated version here - elf: 0x09DAD0D0 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 144 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 208 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 248 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 272 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 312 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 336 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 376 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 412 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 436 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 476 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 492 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 2 len: 516 -----------------------> // After this no cmd_code = 2 is used elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 556 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 572 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 588 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 604 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 604 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 604 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 604 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 ... elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218096 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218100 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218100 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218100 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218100 elf: 0x09DB9F40 ; cmd_code: 0 len: 218104 --------------------------> After 1 hour I am mostly a beginer to this elf thing. From the report above, I am not sure that I deduce anthing. Well my testcase is a series of .byte directives (its an image) Thanks for the response. Could you also throw some light on the findings -if any- from the above. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, J.C. Pizarro wrote: > Patch it to investigate it a little bit more. > > After runned it, see "quickdirty.log" and post here your report's summary. > > ;) > -- Regards, Anitha B @S A N K H Y A
0 is ELF_C_NULL 1 is ELF_C_READ 2 is ELF_C_WRITE You can have an idea that the problem is not in the writing of files, but it's growing slow!!! No ELF_C_READ here!!!
